It's finally here! One month after we opened up TLMC10, the judging has concluded and we're now ready to reveal our finalists.
From the pool of submitted maps, we chose 3 Macro Maps, 3 Standard Maps, 3 Rush Maps, and 3 "New" Maps. In addition, we had four (4) "Judge's Choice" picks, which could come from any category. For this particular contest, we felt that the Standard category’s maps were the strongest, so this season we will have 6 Standard maps in the map pool, as well as 4 Macro maps.
Again, we will be working with all mappers in the coming two phases (WardiTV Tournament Phase and Iteration Phase) to improve the maps before the final voting stage where you, the Starcraft community, will get to pick who wins additional cash prizes.
You can find the maps on AM, EU, and KR by searching for [TLMC10].
FINALISTS
Macro Maps
A total of 38 maps were submitted to this category. For this category, judges focused on the ones that truly promoted macro play and had interesting layouts throughout the entire map.
Treachery | Youngrustler
Treachery is a larger map that allows players to play into the late game. It has a very safe layout and offers different paths of expansion, which can lead to different games.
Unlike other large macro maps, this one stays at a size where it doesn't feel too daunting to play on.
16-Bit | themusic246
This retro red vs. blue digital landscape accommodates many play styles. Capture watchtowers to watch your perimeters and strategically take down the rocks to create an aggressive attack path.
The pocket natural tends to lead towards longer games while not being too favorable towards turtling after the forward natural is taken.
Kherrisan Rift | Solstice245
Kherrisan Rift is a large map with a third base defended by rocks and a rock tower on one side.
From there you have the choice to expand to the central or outer highground areas, each with defensive locations to take advantage of.
As the game progresses, paths on the sides of the map can be used for run-bys.
Para Site | Zweck
Para Site features a very non-linear expansion pattern. There are three options for your third base, as well as your fourth and fifth bases.
At first, it's easy to hold three or four bases, but bases tend to be more spread out as the game progresses.
The central area is varied, with some paths being more favorable towards open fights or surrounds than others.
Standard Maps
A total of 42 maps were submitted to this category. In this category, the judges looked for maps that were well-executed or gave us slight deviations from what we're used to.
Blueshift | NegativeZero
Blueshift is a medium-sized 14 base route. The fastest attack route is a corridor straight down the middle, with defensive chokes at either end. Vision is obscured by numerous sight blockers in the middle of the corridor.
Larger high ground paths flanking this path serve as more open routes to the opponent's expansions. Later in the game, 4 large rocks connecting the two can be destroyed to connect the central corridor to the outer paths, opening up the map significantly.
Players can expand in either direction, but in the long-term, expanding towards the forward high ground is optimal.
Fracture | AVEX
The thirds are relatively normally spaced but might feel a little far due to the straight line that is the attack path between the two bases.
This map features a low base count, and is more narrow than macro maps as a nod to the medium maps of Heart of the Swarm.
The Main-to-Main distance remains standard compared to most maps, in order to keep the early game of Legacy relatively untouched.
Cerulean Falls | Solstice245
There is a standard main and natural expansion setup, and a lengthy linear path between opposing bases.
Multiple options for a 3rd exist, and these expand into numerous options for a 4th.
The center has high-ground expansions that can be an important acquisition late into the game.
Artana | IronManSC
A technical map with a straightforward pathway to your enemy. Utilize the high ground advantage to defeat your opponent.
There are two watch towers that cover the side pathways and promote positional gameplay by both players.
Overall, this map is standard in both layout and gameplay style.
Lost and Found | Zweck
A standard map that allows for a variety of strategies, from early pressure to a late-game focus.
Choke points and attack paths are varied in their size and width. Using the appropriate ones at the right time can be critical.
Opening up the rocks in the center lets you switch lanes more quickly in the later stages of the game.
Digital Frontier | NegativeZero
The direct rush path is hindered by rows of LoS blockers and an extremely narrow central choke, which can be abused in the correct position, or widened by killing the adjacent rocks.
Though the 3rd is open, it's tucked against the main and easy to defend - additional bases are more vulnerable.
The placement of 4 large rocks encourages army movement outwards along the high grounds until they're destroyed, at which point the map becomes extremely easy to traverse, with an open path to almost any location.
The expansion pattern leads clockwise but becomes ambiguous in the late game, with the side bases able to be contested by either player.
Rush Maps
19 maps were primarily submitted in this category. For Rush maps, we looked for maps that weren't just smaller scale versions of standard maps. In general, a combination of creative ideas and execution on those ideas dominated this category.
Arashi | AVEX
Narrow map with a straight path directly between the main and natural connected by relatively sizable ramps.
Bases are relatively standard and potentially defensive for the first three locations, but may become increasingly difficult as the game progresses, holding many points of interest for army engagements relatively close to expansions.
Cybros Relay Station | octomologyst
The rush distance and path are favorable for reinforcing and moving towards the third bases.
Air access is slightly limited, meaning drops or other air units can be intercepted near the main, but they can still sneak past.
Players can take a more recessed, choked off third in a linear set up or go for the more open triangular third, depending on their game plan.
Dreamcatcher | VSG
Dreamcatcher is a angled mirrored map that effectively uses all four corners of the map, while featuring a smaller size and shorter rush distance.
Collapsable rocks give players the option to divert the attack path. When one rock is taken down, both collapse.
Players have a choice of expanding to the top right versus the bottom left. Both routes have different benefits.
New Maps
There were 25 maps submitted in this category. For New maps, we focused on ideas that we felt would truly change how the maps played. Maps were excluded for a variety of reasons, including execution, not introducing any particularly new features, and being too obviously imbalanced.
System Shock | Zweck
This map has rectangular up-down symmetry that creates a shorter rush distance. To partly make up for this, this map features watchtowers accessible from both players' natural expansions that provide scouting information.
This scouting information can potentially lead to more strategical depth or mind games.
A player's watchtower can not be activated from the opposing player's side of the map.
A no-fly zone exists between the natural expansions to counteract the short air distance.
Backpfeifengesicht | NegativeZero
The backdoor gold base poses an interesting problem: not only is it extremely vulnerable to harassment, but mining it out opens a direct attack path straight into the back of your main.
A watchtower between the main additionally allows for easy scouting information on both the gold bases and potential attacks from the air.
In sharp contrast, the Eastern section of the map is fairly open and standard.
Travincal | AVEX
Travincal features tall stone walls amongst the manmade highground. These walls act as line-of-sight blockers and will block vision of all units, ground and air, preventing sight of units on the other side.
These walls, like LOS blockers, will become very transparent if units are nearby in order to not hinder visibility during engagements.
The addition of this feature should change the way how armies will engage in the early and midgame, and create interesting situations throughout the map's lifespan.
What's Next?
Congratulations to all the mappers who made it to the finals. Not only do we want to highlight the maps that progressed to the final 16, we want to highlight the mappers that have brought you these great maps:
Solstice245 and themusic246 are first-time finalists who have been entering quality maps since TLMC8.
IronManSC (TLMC1 2nd, TLMC2 2nd) is an old-school mapper who created Ohana and Mech Depot.
Zweck is another first time finalist who got an impressive three maps into the finals!
octomologyst is a finalist who just started entering maps in TLMC9.
VSG, formerly known as Timmay, is the creator of Catallena.
Youngrustler is in the finals for third time in a row.
AVEX (TLMC8 1st, TLMC9 1st), creator of Blackpink, Odyssey, Blood Boil, and Invader, has three maps in the finals.
NegativeZero (TLMC6 1st, TLMC7 2nd, TLMC9 2nd), creator of Abiogenesis, Catalyst, Sequencer, Interloper, Apotheosis, and Terraform, has three maps in the finals.
Starting tomorrow, WardiTV will be hosting its WardiTV Teamliquid Map Test Contest Tournament exclusively on these maps. Similarly to the last TLMC, the lineup involved is one of strongest lineups we've ever seen in an online tournament, so make sure you tune in.
Afterwards, mappers will be given time to balance and touch up their maps for the final judging process where you can vote for your favorite maps. The entire process is detailed here. So what do you think about the finalists? What are your favorite maps? Which maps got snubbed? Leave your thoughts and comments below!
Not hugely impressed by these maps as a whole--they seem fine, but none of them really stand out to me. At least there aren't any maps that seem way off this time.
Congrats to the new faces good to see some fresh blood coming into the mapping scene! Also congrats to the other finalist and good luck! Can't wait to see my map in the tournament and some others.
Congrats to everyone who has maps in the finals. Really excited to see the games play out. As always, if any mappers have any questions for me regarding my own voting and reasoning, feel free to reach out. I'm happy to talk.
Some really good, solid maps on this list. 16-Bit and Backpfeifengesicht are stand-outs to me, both execute one concept exceptionally well. Cerulean Falls and Blueshift are both excellent looking standardish maps. I wouldn't be surprised to see Fracture in the top 3.
These maps are all so pretty. I wonder if mapmakers have found a loophole to winning this, by making them as pretty as possible. How can Dreamcatcher not win?
They all look swell, withholding judgement till Waardi's tournament.
16bit stands out to me for nostalgia reasons i guess for its look. But as usual the maps are all very good, that is why they made it this far! Good luck to all.
Looks good from first view. Have to open them in-game before I can form a more detailed opinion, I suggest everyone to do the same. Being actually in a game on a map gives a much more in-depth impression than just looking at a picture or even watching games played on stream.
Think they made a pretty bold statement about the future of maps with me and sidian both not getting any maps in when the submissions from both were more than decent. Super standard or die, even the new and rush maps aren't all that interesting. Neg zero's is not bad, at least.
Not really salty just disappointed as the game/scene is so uninteresting with this direction. (not to mention the game itself still has some major design flaws, such as air being way too strong)
Probably quitting mapping for other hobbies, I could maybe make some finalists next time by just phoning it in and making ultra standard maps but I feel like my whole thing these years has been to make interesting maps, and I would be cheating myself to give in and it would feel hollow. We'll see, maybe I'll be one of the "retired" ones that comes back for TLMC every time, lol.
I'll probably do a feedback post sometime later this week, unfortunately on weekdays I get too busy with work to be able to do much sc2 wise. Only map of mine that I was quite confident about was King's Cove so I"m a little surprised that map didn't make it but maybe there were issues with it I did not see.
Either way, congratulations to the winners, especially Solstice, Music & Zweck for being first timers in the finals, that's awesome work you guys and hope you all continue to map make in future ones!
The names don't need to be a category because if there is a problem with a map's name, and it makes it to the ladder, Blizzard will want it changed. I think this is what happened to Avex's map Odyssey. It used to be known as Windwaker.
However, Backfasfkasfhskjghdndnvkm is a really frustrating name. Can we come up with a nickname for this map? Let's call it Bob or something.
EDIT: LOL I just plugged the name into google translate hahaha I love it!
On February 15 2018 00:44 Antares777 wrote: The names don't need to be a category because if there is a problem with a map's name, and it makes it to the ladder, Blizzard will want it changed. I think this is what happened to Avex's map Odyssey. It used to be known as Windwaker.
However, Backfasfkasfhskjghdndnvkm is a really frustrating name. Can we come up with a nickname for this map? Let's call it Bob or something.
EDIT: LOL I just plugged the name into google translate hahaha I love it!
And tbh I'm not hugely surprised to not see Sidian be a finalist. I thought Blaze of Glory and Absolute Zero were just rather bad maps, Eternium's natural is obviously problematic, Dust over Dawn's middle seemed a bit suspect, leaving Blackwood Timbers and King's Cove to have a chance at the finals. And while I might like those two maps or some of RQM's maps better than some of the actual finalists in those categories, there is some variance to what maps end up finalists.
On February 14 2018 19:38 Fatam wrote: Not really salty just disappointed as the game/scene is so uninteresting with this direction. (not to mention the game itself still has some major design flaws, such as air being way too strong)
Oh so I'm not the only one who thinks air play is disgusting from a mapmaker's point of view. So tired of seeing game where terrain almost doesn't matter in the late game because big clumps of air units can just ignore it.
On February 14 2018 20:29 SidianTheBard wrote: I'll probably do a feedback post sometime later this week, unfortunately on weekdays I get too busy with work to be able to do much sc2 wise. Only map of mine that I was quite confident about was King's Cove so I"m a little surprised that map didn't make it but maybe there were issues with it I did not see.
Either way, congratulations to the winners, especially Solstice, Music & Zweck for being first timers in the finals, that's awesome work you guys and hope you all continue to map make in future ones!
<3 all the support you guys.
I was surprised when I saw that none of the ones we pushed through ended up being yours. For King's Cove basically the only thing wrong with it was that the 3rd is just so far away. The rest of the map was quite interesting but unfortunately that doesn't really matter when protoss can't even stabilize on 3 bases.
On February 14 2018 20:29 SidianTheBard wrote: I'll probably do a feedback post sometime later this week, unfortunately on weekdays I get too busy with work to be able to do much sc2 wise. Only map of mine that I was quite confident about was King's Cove so I"m a little surprised that map didn't make it but maybe there were issues with it I did not see.
Either way, congratulations to the winners, especially Solstice, Music & Zweck for being first timers in the finals, that's awesome work you guys and hope you all continue to map make in future ones!
<3 all the support you guys.
I was surprised when I saw that none of the ones we pushed through ended up being yours. For King's Cove basically the only thing wrong with it was that the 3rd is just so far away. The rest of the map was quite interesting but unfortunately that doesn't really matter when protoss can't even stabilize on 3 bases.
Is there going to be a separate thread like last time for asking for feedback from the judges? Or should we just ask here? (if so I'd appreciate feedback for Mayak Facility and Pharaoh)
Yeah there will be Ziggurat Hopefully it will be up by the weekend, or maybe I'll set it up today, and start answering people on the weekend? But yeah, keep an eye out it should be up soon™
I like the wide open pocket third of 16-bit but fear a protoss imbalance since they are most likely to do early air openings than the other races. Additionally I like A Face In Need Of A Fist but I worry that it will encourage constant all-ins from zerg.
The rest look fine
Hopefully I can find the time to watch the vods from the tournament so I can decide which map(s) I want to veto next season.
When the results of this TLMC were uploaded, I was disappointed that some of my better maps didn't make it, and that some weaker maps were finalists. That is very typical. I have my biases, as does everyone else. However, after some time, I usually cool down. While I often disagree with the judges' decisions, I know most of them were acting in good faith. This time, however, I think the organizers made a serious mistake. The panel of judges featured zero Terran pros, and had an extremely biased Protoss judge. I am not going to accuse anyone of being biased towards or against any specific mapmaker. I submitted with an alias specifically to avoid bias for or against me, and one of my maps was a finalist, so there certainly wasn't a vendetta against me. However, as a result of this slanted panel for TLMC10, I think some very strong maps were left out in favor of weaker maps that are more comfortable for a certain race.
Let's be honest. There was some bias involved, and it resulted in us not getting the best possible 16 maps. Terran has been struggling in recent months, especially vs Protoss. Now that Terran is finally becoming viable again, we're back to Zerg and Protoss favored maps.
After the results were leaked, some of us asked about maps on the edge of being a finalist. Snowfall and Bloom in particular were very close to making it, but they were kept out because of one specific TvP tank push. That's right, one Terran build may have possibly been strong in a match-up where Terran is struggling, and that was enough to kill some very good maps. Instead, we ended up with more massive two spawn rotational maps, which are almost certainly not going to be balanced.
Here are win-rates on some of the historically large two spawn maps:
Ascension to Aiur is 160x132, Mech Depot is 152x152, and Odyssey is 152x156. Each map clearly caused problems for Terran players. Odyssey was even outside what most pros would consider to be acceptable balance with Terran win-rates below 45% in two match-ups. If Terrans had any representation in the TLMC, they would have been able to explain why we're trying to trend away from these large map sizes.
Liquipedia win-rates do not tell the whole story, but they do have a large sample size. And most of us understand why maps that huge are a problem for Terran. We all know that Terrans need to be aggressive against Zerg and Protoss, and that isn't possible with some of the giant maps that became finalists. Bloom is 120x156, which isn't small. Snowfall is 144x144, which is actually quite large. Are we really going to pretend that one Terran push is going to dominate these normal sized maps? Maybe it's why the more reasonably sized Sovereign lost to Cerulean Fall. The macro category has more than its required number of finalists, so at least one could have easily been exchanged for a better sized map. Other possible finalists could have been re-categorized when it made sense to meet the quota.
The irony here is that a lot of features we put in place were to help Protoss while they were struggling against Zerg. The rocks on Bloom (which could be removed in one second during quality assurance) were there to make the third a little easier for Protoss to hold versus Zerg. The architecture of Snowfall is similarly structured to make PvZ balanced.
The judging situation likely also had implications on other categories. Maps like Midnight and Cyberspace probably made the Protoss judges unhappy, and with no alternative opinions from Terran, we were left with a very weak finalist instead. Cybros Relay Station clearly isn't up to the same standards as the rest of the finalists. While it is far safer than the alternatives, why not take a risk with a higher quality map that might be good? This is the rush category after all, and the judges never expected perfectly balanced rush maps in other TLMCs.
Next time, the organizers should make sure we have balanced representation among judges. Also, Terran players need to get off their asses and consider investing some time with the map scene.
EDIT: The original post was originally more accusatory towards me, hence why I replied so directly. The more personal matters have since been settled privately.
Ok, so I guess I'll need to respond to this to give my point of view of the matter. I'll start by saying if I hurt any map makers feelings (which I apparently did) on doing the judging for this TLMC then I do apologize. It was not my intention to anger anyone.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote:
Let's be honest. There was some bias involved, and it resulted in us not getting the best possible 16 maps. Terran has been struggling in recent months, especially vs Protoss. Now that Terran is finally becoming viable again, we're back to Zerg and Protoss favored maps.
I was asked to join the voting panel and after seeing that I was the only protoss player there it seemed like I was being brought on to give a protoss perspective on the maps submitted.
I was told to vote yes/no/maybe on the maps provided to me without any of the map maker's names on them. I then did so, trying to view them as objectively as possible while still voicing any concerns that I thought would be problematic. The other judges would then give their opinions and collectively we decided on what should or shouldn't have been included. Both PengWin and Snute were two of the other judges that also had their inputs into the maps and agreed with some of the concerns that I brought up. This was a collective process and not just one of me going on a personal tirade to get the most out of this TLMC.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: After the results were leaked, some of us asked about maps on the edge of being a finalist. Snowfall and Bloom in particular were very close to making it, but they were kept out because of one specific TvP tank push. That's right, one Terran build may have possibly been strong in a match-up where Terran is struggling, and that was enough to kill some very good maps. Instead, we ended up with more massive two spawn rotational maps, which are almost certainly not going to be balanced.
One concern that many protoss have had in the past is tank pushes ruining the match up. While it may not be something that has been seen as much recently, there's nothing saying that it won't come back into play if more strong maps cater to it. You said yourself, Terran is becoming viable again, so that potential strength cannot be ignored just because it hasn't been happening recently.
When there were so many maps that were submitted it becomes an issue of the lesser of multiple evils. Sure a lot of maps could be fixed with some adjustments, but when the issue became all of them needing to be adjusted by small adjustments we had to make a choice on which ones to put through or not. It was hard to decide on which to put through, I agree, but it was with the cooperation of all of the judges that the decisions were made. A good few of the other maps that were being discussed could have gone through in place of others, but unfortunately we can only pick 16.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: Here are win-rates on some of the historically large two spawn maps:
Ascension to Aiur is 160x132, Mech Depot is 152x152, and Odyssey is 152x156. Each map clearly caused problems for Terran players. Odyssey was even outside what most pros would consider to be acceptable balance with Terran win-rates below 45% in two match-ups. If Terrans had any representation in the TLMC, they would have been able to explain why we're trying to trend away from these large map sizes.
Liquipedia win-rates do not tell the whole story, but they do have a large sample size. And most of us understand why maps that huge are a problem for Terran. We all know that Terrans need to be aggressive against Zerg and Protoss, and that isn't possible with some of the giant maps that became finalists. Bloom is 120x156, which isn't small. Snowfall is 144x144, which is actually quite large. Are we really going to pretend that one Terran push is going to dominate these normal sized maps? Maybe it's why the more reasonably sized Sovereign lost to Cerulean Fall.
Actually, the reason Sovereign lost out was because of how small the map was in coordination with how far away and open its 3rd base is. Generally, the larger the map the more open it's 3rd is allowed to be, but when it's as small as Soveriegn is having a 3rd that far away, while also being on higher ground, would be difficult against Zerg. Even the zerg players in PengWin and Snute agreed with this and were the first ones to mention it in the Skype group to begin with.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: The macro category has more than its required number of finalists, so at least one could have easily been exchanged for a better sized map. Other possible finalists could have been re-categorized when it made sense to meet the quota.
What I will say here is that I agree that the panel would have obviously benefitted from having terrans in the judging process. It would have brought the issues to the table that you mentioned. However, the same argument could be made from that angle. Saying that a terran put down X maps from going through because of Terran bias and that the race has been underperforming, thus the judge went into the process with an agenda of making Terran as strong as possible.
As much as they would be voicing their concerns for their race, so was I for protoss. Did that mean I was trying to undermine the whole process and make my race the best represented? No. I saw I was the only protoss in a line of mostly zergs and some others so I thought I was brought on to give my perspective with my background. So I voiced the concerns that I believed deserved to be looked at and then the rest of the panel reviewed those concerns as well to get to the final vote. They all could have denied my concerns and overruled me just as easily as I brought them up.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: The irony here is that a lot of features we put in place were to help Protoss while they were struggling against Zerg. The rocks on Bloom (which could be removed in one second during quality assurance) were there to make the third a little easier for Protoss to hold versus Zerg.
I don't know how having some rocks on one of three ramps leading into the 3rd base makes taking the 3rd vs zerg any easier. No zerg is going to be using the furthest ramp to get into the 3rd base, they would just be going through either the rightmost one or the one in the middle. Even if they wanted to do a dual pronged attack on the natural and 3rd they would have the time to kill the rocks anyway However, I wasn't the only one who said something against the map as PengWin gave a No and Snute a maybe.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: The judging situation likely also had implications on other categories. Maps like Midnight and Cyberspace probably made the Protoss judges unhappy
Actually, for Midnight every single one of the panel members gave it a No except for Templar who gave it a Maybe. And for Cyberspace Kantuva was the only one to give it a Yes.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: and with no alternative opinions from Terran, we were left with a very weak finalist instead. Cybros Relay Station clearly isn't up to the same standards as the rest of the finalists. While it is far safer than the alternatives, why not take a risk with a higher quality map that might be good? This is the rush category after all, and the judges never expected perfectly balanced rush maps in other TLMCs.
Snute specifically thought that Cybros was one of the best maps, if not the best map, submitted into this TLMC and said he thought it would be the next GOAT of SC2 maps. I also think it is a strong map.
This is a theme with map makers and players though. Players are generally going to want more maps that are closer to standard instead of taking huge risks. That issue has been debated continuously in the past but with maps like Dasan Station, Battle on the Boardwalk, and Abiogenesis getting into the ladder pool there was some concerns on some maps being the next insta veto for 90% o the playerbase.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote: Next time, the organizers should make sure we have balanced representation among judges. Also, Terran players need to get off their asses and consider investing some time with the map scene.
Again, I agree that there should be at least one representative for each race on the panel. However, I have already decided that I won't be a protoss representative in the future.
Do I think I got in over my head by accepting a simple offer? Yes absolutely. I have learned a lot about map making and what goes into maps during and after this, and conclude that suppose I am not fully fit to judge such a large variety of maps.
I was only voicing concerns that I believed should be mentioned and then let the discussion of the panel revolve around those concerns in one way or the other that resulted in what we have now. But those were not the only things being mentioned. They were not the only concerns that were brought up and it surely was not the intended focus of the entire judging process.
Once again, I apologize to any map makers that feel I personally attacked them with how I voted, it was not at all my intentions and I simply was accepting an offer.
Are 4 players maps just out of the question these days? I always thought they were pretty fun to play on. I get that they can sometimes be problematic at the highest level but it's sad to see them go because of it.
On February 15 2018 19:13 algue wrote: Are 4 players maps just out of the question these days? I always thought they were pretty fun to play on. I get that they can sometimes be problematic at the highest level but it's sad to see them go because of it.
i think they can make people lose even at lower levels... things as simple as scouting the wrong direction and dying to a rush.
I really really really really like 16-bit and I really hope that map gets put into the ladder.. its just Aesthetically so nice and I love the layout of the map, a lot of maps don't have in base naturals on ladder lately o-o all I could want more from it is just more airspace for libs and medivacs
Ok, so I can't address everything right now, but I'll chime on on some things
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote:Maybe it's why the more reasonably sized Sovereign lost to Cerulean Fall. The macro category has more than its required number of finalists, so at least one could have easily been exchanged for a better sized map. Other possible finalists could have been re-categorized when it made sense to meet the quota.
Sovereign didnt "lost" to Cerulean Falls, they were submitted to different categories, and being completely honest, I think had Sovereign been sent to Standard, and Cerulean to Macro, I think both maps would have become finalists. Yet, because Sovereign is more aggressive than several other maps in the Macro category it didnt live up to the category it was sent to, mostly because of its comparatively open third bases, specially the highground one, I think, had Sovereign had those diagonal rocks rotated 90º and protecting the highground third, then it would have rather easily breakdanced into the finalists.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote:The irony here is that a lot of features we put in place were to help Protoss while they were struggling against Zerg. The rocks on Bloom (which could be removed in one second during quality assurance) were there to make the third a little easier for Protoss to hold versus Zerg.
We will not, repeat, will not make balance changes to maps on the QA phase of things, It is a very fine line to walk on, but if we deem that a map requires balance changes in order for it to be "great", then we will most often than not lean on another map which is already "good", but does not require changes.
Why is this? Because y'all had time to make sure your maps are on a balanced state, the maps we take into TLMC are considered final. There are no "backsies" here.
Adding an early iteration phase to TLMC might easily mean adding 2 extra weeks of time to TLMC, and because of the increased work load, then it means that judges wouldnt be volunteers, they would need to be paid positions, and that's a huge can of worms compared to how things work now, not to even dare mention all the scheduling that would need to take place, on TL's side & Blizzard.
"Believe me", we wish we could do these kind of things, couple maps got actually cut for dumb reasons which could have been fixed on 7 seconds of "work", but it is your responsibility as Mapmakers to deliver finished works.
So yeah, QA phase, is Quality Assurance for the TLMC tournament, not "Map rebalancing phase".
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote:Cybros Relay Station clearly isn't up to the same standards as the rest of the finalists. While it is far safer than the alternatives, why not take a risk with a higher quality map that might be good? This is the rush category after all, and the judges never expected perfectly balanced rush maps in other TLMCs.
That, to me is a way of shadowy saying the map looks "ugly", TLMC isnt a contest designed to find the prettiest maps out there, if your map looks alright, because you cared and put work into creating a nice enviroment, that's fine, but what's key is that the map "works". Imo in the past TLMC has failed to give maps which "work", but personally, I dont see that being the case with Cybros.
On February 15 2018 13:39 Timmay wrote:Next time, the organizers should make sure we have balanced representation among judges. Also, Terran players need to get off their asses and consider investing some time with the map scene.
Hopefully you could help us trying to poach us some T GM/Pro's to judge next time, Im sure Plexa and Templar would be interested for the only reason that it would light up their workloads.
If the naming conventions that led to Blackpink and Dreamcatcher continue, for all we know we might see the Blizzcon finals played on a map named Weki Meki...
On February 15 2018 05:23 Gemini_19 wrote: I was surprised when I saw that none of the ones we pushed through ended up being yours. For King's Cove basically the only thing wrong with it was that the 3rd is just so far away. The rest of the map was quite interesting but unfortunately that doesn't really matter when protoss can't even stabilize on 3 bases.
Just curious what other feedback you had considering the 3rd base on King's is a shorter distance and much more easily defended than a handful of the other finalist standard and macro maps.
CYBROS RELAY STATION absolutely needs some work aesthetics wise. I usually don't mind weird texturing but this just looks sloppy
Despite being a rush map, I think DREAMCATCHER could use a slightly longer rush distance with some rocks blocking direct access to the dreamcatcher's center for example
Other than that i'd say that the maps choosen by the judges this TLMC edition are quite good! Nice job
On February 15 2018 19:13 algue wrote: Are 4 players maps just out of the question these days? I always thought they were pretty fun to play on. I get that they can sometimes be problematic at the highest level but it's sad to see them go because of it.
i think they can make people lose even at lower levels... things as simple as scouting the wrong direction and dying to a rush.
Not only this, but they make for less interesting maps because the corners (or wherever the mains are) need to be designed as a main base. So at the bases where nobody spawns there will always be this high-ground dead-end with a tucked in natural, which is bad design in my opinion. It's better to have a 2-player map that is designed optimally for the spawn points.
Not a bad map at all, main/nat is great. I believe the gold bases are completely useless and won't accomplish much at all since they are such aggressive placements. The other part about this map I dislike is that if you expand horizontally you can get five base and only have to defend two 3wide ramps and only 3wide non-ramp choke. Eventually, you'll just park your army between the 3rd/4th (around the gold ramp) and you can not move a muscle and hold 5 bases. It's not that fun.
There are a lot of abusive spots for tank pushes (which eliminated many other maps) such as behind the forward 3rd minerals, behind the gold base minerals and behind the 3rd horizontal base minerals sieging the natural or eventually the horizontal 4th base into the 3rd base.
The 6 & 9 bases will never get used because they are too close to the opponent, especially since that's the main why they have to expand, might as well just get rid of those bases. Also, what's the point of the random ramp with rocks on it toward the middle? It doesn't accomplish much at all, it doesn't help much early or mid game, it's useless, just a wasted path with rocks.
________
16-Bit - 140x156 - Macro
Another in-base natural map, yeaaa! I love the fact that you can siege in the middle (by the middle 4th base) and you can crush the main, nat and third! It's such an abusive drop position. Let's not even mention a siege tank or two behind the middle rocks (by the forward 4th) and you can keep pushing and sieging everything until you eventually take down those rocks. After the rocks are down, this map is very "3rd to 3rd too straight" so it should be auto disqualified, because that's what happened last tlmc, but hey, add rocks and it doesn't matter.
The watchtowers give waaaay too much vision. Unless you take out middle rocks or take the super quick path in the middle you will always be seen. It's not good gameplay at all.
The other base side about this map, is that no where in the entire map has a larger than 3x WG choke. How are zerg suppose to flank, surround or engage into anything? It makes it even worse when you have an in-base natural and can easily turtle on 3 base and basically defend everything. Good luck defending drops that abuse the forward 4th and your inbase natural. To defend you'll have to swing from your forward 4th, to your out-base natural, into your main, down into your inbase natural, only to go back again. If terran add siege tanks by your forward 4th, you're only that much more screwed.
_______
Kherrisan Rift - 152x152 - Macro
Not only will this map be easily abusible for proxy stargates, it'll be ridiculous to hold many proxy whatever. There are absolutely no forward bases which mean you just hug the entire outside of the map, which is really stupid and really boring, it makes games constantly be defensive the entire time.
The worst part about this map, besides very abusive proxy, lib, drop and siege tank spots, are that the overall flow of the map is quite limited. I don't know why the included the random doodad wall directly in the middle because that completely limits paths. If you want to flank, or do anything with your army you completely put yourself out of place. You have to move around a ton of choked off pathways which make to boring gameplay. Expect tons of doom drops, proxies, and overall boring gameplay on this map.
Also, what the hell is that drock tower and random drock by the 3rd? How abusive is that? How stupid is that? Ugh... But hey, super choked, abusive bases that are anti-zerg? May as well include it!
Ideas that may make it better.
________
Para Site - 140x152 - Macro
First off, let's see, protoss either take a very far away 3rd, or a completely open one. As Gemini said, bad 3rd, auto veto. But at least this map got into a finalist. I can see a shit load of abusive siege, lib and drop spots. The 6/9 bases are very awkward with movement and drop space, you really can't defend them against air units, aka, GL Libs / Oracles crushing everything. Could you imagine a P/Z taking the horizontal 3rd and siege tank sitting up by the forward base or even a tank/lib sitting down the ramp to the triangle 3rd crushing anything that runs down the main ramp? GG, poor pathing placement imo. Let's not even mention tank pushes on the horizontal 3rd sieging the natural being very OP.
Besides the many many many random abusible spots, it's not a bad map. If a non-terran can get over 2 base you'll probably see some fun games on this, but good luck getting that.
Why don't you include space behind your minerals for defensive buildings or at least units to get behind them to attack air units or stop drops? /sigh
_________
Blueshift - 136x136 - Standard
First off, I love that the master troll himself, NegativeZero can just rotate Catalyst 90 degrees and retexture it and judges will vote it into another finalist spot. It's a good map, it's very standard and doesn't offer much new and many players will love this. The worst part. We already have this map on ladder now. It's called Catalyst. Load up Catalyst, tilt your head 90 degrees and you'll see Blueshift.
But hey, standard is standard and everybody loves standard so we may as well vote this standard map into the finalists because catalyst is standard and catalyst is blueshift so if catalyst is standard and blueshift is catalyst then blueshift is standard. Make sense?
Also, unless you expand vertically, good luck holding many bases, they are so damn close to each other you'll blink and armies will be at your base. Check it, forward 3rd to forward 3rd is about 15 seconds apart. zzzz. But hey, Catalyst worked, so Blueshift should too eh?
________
Fracture - 144x122 - Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. Weird...since this 3rd base is ridiculously open, far away and abusive. But hey, let's be biased, why not. This is a good map if you are able to expand vertically, unfortunately protoss and possibly terran won't be able to do that, instead you have to expand horizontally, which is further away and also more vulnerable, especially with drops, tanks, libs, mutas, oracles, warp prisms, aka, anything that normally happens in the game now a day.
It's a good map, if only the triangle 3rd base second ramp was moved to make it a little more defensible. Not much to say outside of that, it's a good map imo.
________
Cerulean Fall - 148x144 - Standard
I honestly don't have much to say about this map because I think it is really good. Lots of paths to flank, lots of paths to attack, not very abusive for drops/libs/sieges. Maaaaybe a siege on the horizontal 3rd sieging into the natural could be strong? But wouldn't be that bad since it can't hit the gas/base. Probably one of the better TLMC finalists. Congrats.
________
Artana - 144x152 -Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. 144x152 is a standard map? Holy balls, standard is getting big. The biggest problem with this map is that the horizontal base is soooo much farther away from the triangle 3rd so you will most likely always take the triangle 3rd base.
I feel some tanks by the middle rocks sieging into the 3rd/nat could be pretty strong, also drops, since you're not almost forced to go triangle 3rd will be pretty strong. Also any siege unit by the 9/3 bases sieging into the triangle 3rd will be really op, especially since they can take the high ground and siege into the 3rd and the defender is forced to run up a 2 wide ramp to defend it, which then they can easily pick up and drop into the main, forcing you to run ALLLLLLL the way back. zzzzzz. But yeah, w/e.
If you make the horizontal 3rd base more desirable it would be a good map, but right now, it's sooo far away, and waaay too risky that it makes the map kinda...bleh. I suppose the only good part is the map is so big compared to other "standard" (shouldn't this size be macro?) maps that it should be alright if that expand horizontally.
__________
Lost and Found - 144x130 - Standard
Honestly, not much to say about this map. It's good. Really good. It's probably the best map of the TLMC10 finalists. Good job Zweck. =)
Bases are close enough, plenty of flanks, not too abusive air/tank/lib spots, not too large, not too small. Zweck did it, he really did. ___________
Digital Frontier - 132x148 - Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot.
Those tank pushes that disqualifed many other maps...did you look at this map? You place a tank vertically below the natural it'll fuck everything up and force you to come through a two wide ramp to defend it. But hey, it's -0, fuck balance, jack off because the god himself created another map. The worst part is you either expand vertically, which is closer, but also harder to defense and keeps you open or you expand triangle, which then you can easily get abused by drops, harass and tanks/libs. You'll be running all around your main, nat & 3rd trying to defend while the entire time they will be training your base nat to nat since it's a complete straight line.
Also, so much LOSB everywhere that proxies may ran supreme. Hiding buildings behind all of those and crossing your fingers that the enemy doesn't scout every single LOSB...zzzz.
__________
Arashi - 122x148 - Rush
I think my favorite part about this "rush" map is that it has a longer nat to nat distance than other standard maps lol. If this map EVER gets over 3 base vs 3 base...I don't even know. Outside the first 3 bases every other base is so close to every other base that it makes the map pretty stupid, especially since the nat and 3rd chokes are a complete straight line into each other. Like, what's the point of the 1 & 7 o clock bases, they'll never get used, it'll never get to a macro game, it's another downfall of the "rush" category. So manyu people think you need a super short rush distance that is a small map which isn't the case, but hey, it's a weak category so of course weak maps win in it. Honestly, get rid of this category and just include 3 more standard/macro maps, it's a waste.
___________
Cybros Relay Station - 136x120 - Rush
Small, Very Choked and limited pathing. FINALIST SPOT!!! Yeaaaa!!!! The best part about this map. "How should I make this base a little more desirable?" Shit a rock and a cactus in the ground!!! Fk Yeah!!!
Not only are the first four bases a complete rip off of Odyssey, the map is so much smaller, which is terrible, the other corners are not well done, the texturing sucks (that shouldn't be a judging issue...) and there are quite a few droppable and tank abusive spots. Hello behind the forward 4th and by the natural two way spot, zzzzz.
I heard you like to flank your units...JK, to flank it'll take forever. But hey, at least we can fall back to the 2x or 3x ramps everywhere in the middle to screw you over. Too small, too agressive, too, meh. But hey, congrats Finalist!
____________
Dreamcatcher - 136x136 - Rush
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot.
Super open and abusible middle ground? Sign me up! I hope we can get many tank drops, libs, marine drops, over lord drops. Please please please! If you wanted a map that doesn't offer any defensive options, vote for Dreamcatcher. I can't even count on my hands how many abusive spots there are on this map, let alone how close bases are once you get after your natural. If it was a rotational map it would have been much better, but the fact that unless you take down the rock towers you get a complete straight line to the nat to nat (or 3rd to 3rd) it makes the map kind of op. Also, if the rock towers go down, part a lib or siege behind it and GG, good luck.
___________
System Shock - 138x142 - New
Soooo...it has air blockers between the nat and nat and that's new? Gotcha, make sense. The rest of the map is completely standard. It's basically new gettysberg but without any aggressive bases and instead all defensive bases. The "new" section won't do jack shit because running through that tiny choke is suicide and the air blockers will just be more annoying then anything. At that point, this might as well just be another Standard map.
But hey, that's "new" for you, why do anything new when you can just make a standard map, throw some "air blockers in" that won't do jack shit for the game and still win. zzzzzz. Honestly, if this was standard, it'd be fine, I wouldn't complain much because the base layout is good, but for this to take a finalist spot for a "new" style of map...seriously?
____________
Backpfeifengesicht - 124x152 - New
A backdoor into your base and mineral walls...which can be dropped, warped over and blinked over. Once again, another "new" map where you will expand horizontally because it's the safest spot. You'll ignore the gold base, you'll ignore any forward bases at all. They will never get used. The base layout will get abused from drops, libs, sieges, blink, warp ins, etc etc, that it will make it a stupid map to play on. The worst part, there are ramps which take the 9 o clock watch tower, giving you vision, defend that, warp in across the gold base, free harass.
The forward half base? Why? It's already super open and will never get takened compared to the other 3rd base? Why make it a half base, it's harder to hold...make it tougher? Riiiight...
Another stupid map with nothing "new" winning the "new" category. At this point, might as well just make another Standard map and throw in a random gold base and maybe you'll win the "new" category.
____________
Travincal - 146x148 - New
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. (See where this is going?)
The best part about this "new" map is you can get 4 or 5 bases before the "new" aspect of the map even makes a difference. Is that a problem? Nah, it's just the stupid as shit category which is called "new". I do think this is the "best new" map of the bunch because there are tons of stone walls which block vision of everything around the middle/3/9 spots of the map.
The 12/6 bases are useless, not sure why they are included as they will never get taken, they are too open and too close to your opponent. Also, I think there are too many LOSB by the forward 3rd, it's already quick open with a lot of abusive spots available for the attack, why make it that much harder to defense.
____________
Overall Rankings:
1: Lost and Found 2: Cerulean Fall 3: Treachery 4: Blueshift 5: Travincal 6: System Shock 7: Para Site 8: 16-Bit 9: Fracture 10: Digital Frontier 11: Artana 12: Dreamcatcher 13: Kherrisan Rift 14: Arashi 15: Backpfeifengesicht 16: Cybros Relay Station
______________
Overall Winner: Zweck.
Good job Zweck, your maps were the best of the best this tournament. You definitely deserve the #1 spot.
So this is going to be my first real response to somebody, if in ever. I may jump around point to point as I'm going to look at the maps in a random order. So why don't I begin.
16-Bit - 140x156 - Macro
Another in-base natural map, yeaaa! I love the fact that you can siege in the middle (by the middle 4th base) and you can crush the main, nat and third! It's such an abusive drop position. Let's not even mention a siege tank or two behind the middle rocks (by the forward 4th) and you can keep pushing and sieging everything until you eventually take down those rocks. After the rocks are down, this map is very "3rd to 3rd too straight" so it should be auto disqualified, because that's what happened last tlmc, but hey, add rocks and it doesn't matter.
16bit, a map I honestly. Looked quickly over when it became a finalist. This map has stuff like like, simple design, red vs blue. FPS that doesn't want to die. But when reading what you said about the map, and me making this response. I opened up the map in the editor for a second time, and not for learning reasons. And you're not wrong. I'm a terran, although not master and above. I do understand when a siege spot is too good.
The Xel'naga towers do their job, as Xel'naga towers. If only it didn't basically cover the whole map, and if you hate turtle shells. Oh boy this map is not for you. As you said Sidian. You can easily turtle on 3 bases, not to mention you can grab the 4th tight to the main, defend 2 locations and watch the rocks and thats now a shell thats hard to break but more possible. Liberators alone can make mining in the back nat/forward nat a living nightmare. And like you said Sidian. siegetanks en libs have 3 strong spots. And just getting to those spots is well, not easy. I would of insta DQed this map for that point, but aww heck the map looks good. Bases are reasonable in most cases, and back nat! who doesn't love a back nat as terran & toss right?
Blueshift - 136x136 - Standard
First off, I love that the master troll himself, NegativeZero can just rotate Catalyst 90 degrees and retexture it and judges will vote it into another finalist spot. It's a good map, it's very standard and doesn't offer much new and many players will love this. The worst part. We already have this map on ladder now. It's called Catalyst. Load up Catalyst, tilt your head 90 degrees and you'll see Blueshift.
But hey, standard is standard and everybody loves standard so we may as well vote this standard map into the finalists because catalyst is standard and catalyst is blueshift so if catalyst is standard and blueshift is catalyst then blueshift is standard. Make sense?
Also, unless you expand vertically, good luck holding many bases, they are so damn close to each other you'll blink and armies will be at your base. Check it, forward 3rd to forward 3rd is about 15 seconds apart. zzzz. But hey, Catalyst worked, so Blueshift should too eh?
I mean, the map is somewhat different. But also makes things difficult. Just taking the third can be difficult, heck good luck trying to take the triangle third. Siege tanks with bio or mech can easily push into that base and siege the main! Honestly the map is horrible. But its also not amazing. Getting late game on this map would be like spotting a unicorn, you'd be insane to fail to win the game as terran on this map. Same with toss. Zerg is fine on this map, basically ZvX on catalyst but somewhat different.
Para Site - 140x152 - Macro
First off, let's see, protoss either take a very far away 3rd, or a completely open one. As Gemini said, bad 3rd, auto veto. But at least this map got into a finalist. I can see a shit load of abusive siege, lib and drop spots. The 6/9 bases are very awkward with movement and drop space, you really can't defend them against air units, aka, GL Libs / Oracles crushing everything. Could you imagine a P/Z taking the horizontal 3rd and siege tank sitting up by the forward base or even a tank/lib sitting down the ramp to the triangle 3rd crushing anything that runs down the main ramp? GG, poor pathing placement imo. Let's not even mention tank pushes on the horizontal 3rd sieging the natural being very OP.
Besides the many many many random abusible spots, it's not a bad map. If a non-terran can get over 2 base you'll probably see some fun games on this, but good luck getting that.
Why don't you include space behind your minerals for defensive buildings or at least units to get behind them to attack air units or stop drops? /sigh
Para site, the parasite of the finalist (had to) Hm let me casually look at the fact that both thirds would be a nightmare to take and hold as toss, and even as terran. as one is open meaning zerg can have a hayday. and the other one is far, also able to be sieged by siegetanks. Same problem if I'm correct a map I liked from IronmanSC and that was Snowfall! This map makes it look easy to do any marine siegetank all-in with liberator support. And toss would just lose against terran if they thought taking the low ground third is a good idea! Zerg well, its zerg. they'll adapt quickly. But the map is generally against PvT and PvZ if they take the more open third.
Cerulean Fall - 148x144 - Standard
I honestly don't have much to say about this map because I think it is really good. Lots of paths to flank, lots of paths to attack, not very abusive for drops/libs/sieges. Maaaaybe a siege on the horizontal 3rd sieging into the natural could be strong? But wouldn't be that bad since it can't hit the gas/base. Probably one of the better TLMC finalists. Congrats.
And you would not be wrong, this map is really good. And it was basically Sovereign flipped differently textured minor base edits and submitted to the standard category! Basically making the macro category needing to be renamed 'turtles wet dreams' as its true. Make an aggressive macro map, seems standard in the wrong category. Just great ._. It's still one of the better TLMC finalist. In fact I was more happy to see this map in the finalist than a few maps I may rant on later.
Kherrisan Rift - 152x152 - Macro
Not only will this map be easily abusible for proxy stargates, it'll be ridiculous to hold many proxy whatever. There are absolutely no forward bases which mean you just hug the entire outside of the map, which is really stupid and really boring, it makes games constantly be defensive the entire time.
The worst part about this map, besides very abusive proxy, lib, drop and siege tank spots, are that the overall flow of the map is quite limited. I don't know why the included the random doodad wall directly in the middle because that completely limits paths. If you want to flank, or do anything with your army you completely put yourself out of place. You have to move around a ton of choked off pathways which make to boring gameplay. Expect tons of doom drops, proxies, and overall boring gameplay on this map.
Also, what the hell is that drock tower and random drock by the 3rd? How abusive is that? How stupid is that? Ugh... But hey, super choked, abusive bases that are anti-zerg? May as well include it!
I honestly like hugging the side of maps, allows center to be constant battles. (like abyssal reef when people bother to go into the center of the map) But this macro map that I really like, yes thing get rather difficult. any proxy alone can be very power and I bet a marine siegetank liberator push will be powerful as well. If only that push was proxied due to center basically cutting it self off twice making the rush distance farther, it looks cool yes. But hinders terran. Most likely for the best though. GJ on making it to the finals though. I feel sad for all the zerg bodies that might pile up soon :/
Fracture - 144x122 - Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. Weird...since this 3rd base is ridiculously open, far away and abusive. But hey, let's be biased, why not. This is a good map if you are able to expand vertically, unfortunately protoss and possibly terran won't be able to do that, instead you have to expand horizontally, which is further away and also more vulnerable, especially with drops, tanks, libs, mutas, oracles, warp prisms, aka, anything that normally happens in the game now a day.
It's a good map, if only the triangle 3rd base second ramp was moved to make it a little more defensible. Not much to say outside of that, it's a good map imo.
I honestly like fracture for its design, I like that the map is basically ice en snow used correctly. But uhh, thirds far and taking it leaves you open to mutas. Zerg is preetty damn good on this map also. It's also a standard map... Would be safer submitted as a rush due to its size but hey its Avex I'm talking about. He made fracture and its a finalist! and not a bad map either. Its good, I'm happy that its a finalist. And thats all I need to say.
Artana - 144x152 -Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. 144x152 is a standard map? Holy balls, standard is getting big. The biggest problem with this map is that the horizontal base is soooo much farther away from the triangle 3rd so you will most likely always take the triangle 3rd base.
I feel some tanks by the middle rocks sieging into the 3rd/nat could be pretty strong, also drops, since you're not almost forced to go triangle 3rd will be pretty strong. Also any siege unit by the 9/3 bases sieging into the triangle 3rd will be really op, especially since they can take the high ground and siege into the 3rd and the defender is forced to run up a 2 wide ramp to defend it, which then they can easily pick up and drop into the main, forcing you to run ALLLLLLL the way back. zzzzzz. But yeah, w/e.
If you make the horizontal 3rd base more desirable it would be a good map, but right now, it's sooo far away, and waaay too risky that it makes the map kinda...bleh. I suppose the only good part is the map is so big compared to other "standard" (shouldn't this size be macro?) maps that it should be alright if that expand horizontally.
Honestly, I got a bit blinded by how good this map looked when I looked at the map to learn off of it. I love the Xel'naga towers and how's it designed. But the triangle third is a bit far, generally defending the third is rough with the slightest amount of miss information. Also a pretty large standard, but like you said Sidian, expanding horizontally is alright. Drops will be good and this map generally would favor most drop play.
Lost and Found - 144x130 - Standard
Honestly, not much to say about this map. It's good. Really good. It's probably the best map of the TLMC10 finalists. Good job Zweck. =)
Bases are close enough, plenty of flanks, not too abusive air/tank/lib spots, not too large, not too small. Zweck did it, he really did.
Love the map, its amazing! Does standard perfectly. It's lighting hurts my eyes but thats a little thing. GJ Zweck, you made a pure ladder quality map! Well in my eyes.
Arashi - 122x148 - Rush
I think my favorite part about this "rush" map is that it has a longer nat to nat distance than other standard maps lol. If this map EVER gets over 3 base vs 3 base...I don't even know. Outside the first 3 bases every other base is so close to every other base that it makes the map pretty stupid, especially since the nat and 3rd chokes are a complete straight line into each other. Like, what's the point of the 1 & 7 o clock bases, they'll never get used, it'll never get to a macro game, it's another downfall of the "rush" category. So manyu people think you need a super short rush distance that is a small map which isn't the case, but hey, it's a weak category so of course weak maps win in it. Honestly, get rid of this category and just include 3 more standard/macro maps, it's a waste.
This map seems better for standard really. I like it though, its interesting in design and Ii like interesting designs. But this map does not suit rush, this map getting to a macro game would be amazing. taking a fourth and fifth would also be magical. Don't need more words as I have none.
Digital Frontier - 132x148 - Standard
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot.
Those tank pushes that disqualifed many other maps...did you look at this map? You place a tank vertically below the natural it'll fuck everything up and force you to come through a two wide ramp to defend it. But hey, it's -0, fuck balance, jack off because the god himself created another map. The worst part is you either expand vertically, which is closer, but also harder to defense and keeps you open or you expand triangle, which then you can easily get abused by drops, harass and tanks/libs. You'll be running all around your main, nat & 3rd trying to defend while the entire time they will be training your base nat to nat since it's a complete straight line.
Also, so much LOSB everywhere that proxies may ran supreme. Hiding buildings behind all of those and crossing your fingers that the enemy doesn't scout every single LOSB...zzzz.
This map, well... It's alright? To get things straight, proxies would be too good due to buildings hiding every. Taking the triangle third is the best option. But can be abused and abused over and over again. As the vertical third, just no. You're not zerg, so don't try terran/toss. It's just too risky X_X well vs zerg. TvT TvP PvT PvP you can take the third and it wouldn't be as risky.
Backpfeifengesicht - 124x152 - New
A backdoor into your base and mineral walls...which can be dropped, warped over and blinked over. Once again, another "new" map where you will expand horizontally because it's the safest spot. You'll ignore the gold base, you'll ignore any forward bases at all. They will never get used. The base layout will get abused from drops, libs, sieges, blink, warp ins, etc etc, that it will make it a stupid map to play on. The worst part, there are ramps which take the 9 o clock watch tower, giving you vision, defend that, warp in across the gold base, free harass.
The forward half base? Why? It's already super open and will never get takened compared to the other 3rd base? Why make it a half base, it's harder to hold...make it tougher? Riiiight...
Another stupid map with nothing "new" winning the "new" category. At this point, might as well just make another Standard map and throw in a random gold base and maybe you'll win the "new" category.
the gold base is interesting in design, but nobody would take it. The forward bases are weird, the half base would just not be taken due to its location :/ this map doesn't show anything new besides terran getting screwed over if they mine the gold base. Same with toss, as zerg can go from a ZvZ thats far-ish to a ZvZ thats basically beside each other!
Travincal - 146x148 - New
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot. (See where this is going?)
The best part about this "new" map is you can get 4 or 5 bases before the "new" aspect of the map even makes a difference. Is that a problem? Nah, it's just the stupid as shit category which is called "new". I do think this is the "best new" map of the bunch because there are tons of stone walls which block vision of everything around the middle/3/9 spots of the map.
The 12/6 bases are useless, not sure why they are included as they will never get taken, they are too open and too close to your opponent. Also, I think there are too many LOSB by the forward 3rd, it's already quick open with a lot of abusive spots available for the attack, why make it that much harder to defense.
Diablo would be my city if I never got into sc2. Either way, I love the map. It does have a good new feature, after people get there when taking their fifth base and bothering to attack. Blink stalkers can be scary. Frames RIP, but other than that Sidian you said it all.
System Shock - 138x142 - New
Soooo...it has air blockers between the nat and nat and that's new? Gotcha, make sense. The rest of the map is completely standard. It's basically new gettysberg but without any aggressive bases and instead all defensive bases. The "new" section won't do jack shit because running through that tiny choke is suicide and the air blockers will just be more annoying then anything. At that point, this might as well just be another Standard map.
But hey, that's "new" for you, why do anything new when you can just make a standard map, throw some "air blockers in" that won't do jack shit for the game and still win. zzzzzz. Honestly, if this was standard, it'd be fine, I wouldn't complain much because the base layout is good, but for this to take a finalist spot for a "new" style of map...seriously?
The only new thing to this map is the Xel'naga watch towers that can see the opposite natural. Drops, nope don't try. Oh you want to try? haha air blockers. Something even pros don't notice until their medivac/warpprism is flying in place into it and not trying to go around :/ On another notes it just an easily defense standard map. well defensive first 3-4 bases.
Treachery - 144x156 - Macro:
Not a bad map at all, main/nat is great. I believe the gold bases are completely useless and won't accomplish much at all since they are such aggressive placements. The other part about this map I dislike is that if you expand horizontally you can get five base and only have to defend two 3wide ramps and only 3wide non-ramp choke. Eventually, you'll just park your army between the 3rd/4th (around the gold ramp) and you can not move a muscle and hold 5 bases. It's not that fun.
There are a lot of abusive spots for tank pushes (which eliminated many other maps) such as behind the forward 3rd minerals, behind the gold base minerals and behind the 3rd horizontal base minerals sieging the natural or eventually the horizontal 4th base into the 3rd base.
The 6 & 9 bases will never get used because they are too close to the opponent, especially since that's the main why they have to expand, might as well just get rid of those bases. Also, what's the point of the random ramp with rocks on it toward the middle? It doesn't accomplish much at all, it doesn't help much early or mid game, it's useless, just a wasted path with rocks.
The map isn't bad at all. Which is true. See no point in the golds though. Sidian you basically explain all that I see is a general concern. Turtling on this map is also easy as its a macro map :D although not as easy as 16bit you can turtle on 3base and make complete use of drops and liberators. Fun ._.
Dreamcatcher - 136x136 - Rush
As Gemini would say, this 3rd is too far with too many openings so protoss can't get a 3rd so fuck the rest of the map, it's auto DQ'd. Oh wait...no it wasn't...it's in the finalist spot.
Super open and abusible middle ground? Sign me up! I hope we can get many tank drops, libs, marine drops, over lord drops. Please please please! If you wanted a map that doesn't offer any defensive options, vote for Dreamcatcher. I can't even count on my hands how many abusive spots there are on this map, let alone how close bases are once you get after your natural. If it was a rotational map it would have been much better, but the fact that unless you take down the rock towers you get a complete straight line to the nat to nat (or 3rd to 3rd) it makes the map kind of op. Also, if the rock towers go down, part a lib or siege behind it and GG, good luck.
This map attempted to grab my dreams as it is beautiful. But just general aggression without defensive option kinda stabs this map. But its a rush map. The bases on this map only get harder for terran/toss to hold vs zerg the more you go towards to bot left. Meaning if you obtain a macro game, you must either be a god. lucky, or the zerg just passed out on the keyboard and wont stop droning.
Cybros Relay Station - 136x120 - Rush
Small, Very Choked and limited pathing. FINALIST SPOT!!! Yeaaaa!!!! The best part about this map. "How should I make this base a little more desirable?" Shit a rock and a cactus in the ground!!! Fk Yeah!!!
Not only are the first four bases a complete rip off of Odyssey, the map is so much smaller, which is terrible, the other corners are not well done, the texturing sucks (that shouldn't be a judging issue...) and there are quite a few droppable and tank abusive spots. Hello behind the forward 4th and by the natural two way spot, zzzzz.
I heard you like to flank your units...JK, to flank it'll take forever. But hey, at least we can fall back to the 2x or 3x ramps everywhere in the middle to screw you over. Too small, too agressive, too, meh. But hey, congrats Finalist!
If one map could contain all of my salt in the finalist 16. This map would be overflowing it it. To get things straight, taking a third? well the triangle third has a random rock and cactus which serves no general point. The other third can be sieged to hell. The rush distance is lethal when a 12 pool is done due to how quickly it can hit. I myself love maps with good decoration. This map makes my eyes wanting to bleed. It's like a beginners 5th map every with some help. You can tell there was an idea, but its out the window now. But its a finalist, I guess congrats you did what I myself when I saw this map's pic in the thread to be impossible. And I thought forgotten city could easily seal a spot. But I wont rant about my own maps.
So alright, my rant about Sidians rant. Was meant to be a response but when I can rant, I rant! I hope next TLMC things are less weird and more than likely BS. Also macro is basically either large standard maps. or turtle heaven. New maps, heres the thing. You cant really do that much 'new' ideas without custom data. Za'Trevix City was going to have bridges that randomly activate or deactivate to create attack paths that change time to time. I noticed custom data was not allowed, so I went with the most standardized map I could make.
The overlap between each category is annoying and can ruin any map. I'd also enjoy if there was also a top 16 maps that just didn't make it to the finalist. So at least those who almost made it to the finalist can see what maps almost made it. Of course these 16 maps if this idea was considered, would not get a tournament dedicated to them as they failed to reach the finalist.
(Also seeing how well all our submissions did in general would be nice, so we don't have that salt of judges basically hiding information that could help :l. But hey, its not what i do. And I'm in no position to say do this and do that.)
Oh hey I was waiting to see how long it would take for someone to point out that Blueshift was basically Catalyst--it took slightly longer than I expected. I'm sure the judges noticed incidentally--except most pros would be more than happy to play on a map pool consisting of seven slightly tweaked copies of Coda or some other appropriately hyper-standard map so the similarity was seen as a plus.
I think I'll post my comments about the maps (though they won't be as salty as Sidian's) after I've seen them play out a bit more.
On February 15 2018 19:13 algue wrote: Are 4 players maps just out of the question these days? I always thought they were pretty fun to play on. I get that they can sometimes be problematic at the highest level but it's sad to see them go because of it.
i think they can make people lose even at lower levels... things as simple as scouting the wrong direction and dying to a rush.
Not only this, but they make for less interesting maps because the corners (or wherever the mains are) need to be designed as a main base. So at the bases where nobody spawns there will always be this high-ground dead-end with a tucked in natural, which is bad design in my opinion. It's better to have a 2-player map that is designed optimally for the spawn points.
This still isn't a problem in broodwar after almost 20 years somehow. You're not wrong however but maybe overstating it
Huge fan of Blueshift and 16-bit. After that it gets harder; Artana, Lost and Found as well as Travincal and Cybros Relay Station are all really good maps.
I have been drafting a massive feedback list for the finalists, but a lot of what I had to say has already been covered and my feedback may not be as in depth as some of the other posts already here. I haven't had enough time to make any diagrams or anything like that. I don't want to seem repetitious, but I am going to be posting my thoughts on the finalists sometime later today when I am back at my desktop. I hope that my thoughts can still be useful for the mapmakers, even if I'm completely wrong
Gotta re-read some of this thread and get caught-up first though! I am also behind on the map tournament as well, gotta get caught up and watch those VODs.
EDIT: My thoughts on the maps (obligatory wall-of-text warning):
Treachery Excellent macro map. Not too large or too limited in expansion paths. Might possibly be Zerg favored due to the total number of bases being so high at 18 and the size being large. I feel like we need more data in order to determine balance. What I like about this map though is the excellent use of space and terrain.
16-Bit Interesting aesthetics that are easy on the eyes. I feel like the map is too open in some areas, and am therefore worried about balance.
Kherrisan Rift Interesting design with flanking pathways around the edges of the map, and more of a fixed third expansion. My initial thoughts are that this map is too choked and restrictive in its pathways for it to be balanced, which is why it did not make it on my shortlist for predicted finalists.
Para Site I love the layout here, it is relatively creative and forces players to be very map aware so that they are not caught off guard or out of position since there is not defined center or single fastest ground route from base to base. At the same time, the pathways are not too restricted. Though the layouts are not similar, I want to draw some comparisons to maps like Galactic Process, Cloud Kingdom, and Echo. These maps all focus strongly on army position and movement, as seen by their layouts and expansion locations. Currently the natural's mineral line can be hit from the low ground by Siege Tanks, which could end up being a balance issue. This was seen in one of the tournament games, I think it was a TvT but I forget.
Blueshift Full disclaimer, this is my favorite map not only of the finalists but also of all the submissions. This made it on my shortlist at the number one spot pretty easily for me, and I will now explain why this map is amazing. The expansions are relatively static with only two ambiguous ones located in the corners. The central corridor shows an excellent understanding of risk vs reward to force players to make choices when deciding how to move around the map. The fastest route is the most risky because it is on low ground surrounded by high ground and forces units through those 2x sized ramps. There is another risk vs reward factor here regarding commitment. If you take the fastest route, there are no other routes other than back the way you came. This means if you want to reposition your units, you would have to go all the way back. This changes when the rocks are destroyed in the later game. Another reason why I love this map is that is wastes almost no map space. What I mean by wasted space is space that is unpathable. Wasted space is something that can become a problem if used excessively. This map uses space so efficiently that the only wasted space exists in some small areas around the boundary of the map.
Fracture The overview does not do this map justice for the level of texturing detail on it. It's very pretty. This map is very standard and was designed well. The third is fixed as a forward third, which may end up being an issue in some matchups. The map is good, but I feel like it could use some touching up and then it would become great. The touching up that I would propose is modifying the layout slightly to make the low ground third easier to secure so that the map no longer has a fixed third and more of a choice of thirds. Generally speaking, the forward third should be more difficult to expand to than the third located further away from your opponent. Here, the forward third is closer by ground ground distance to the natural than the low ground third, and army positioning is easier and less stressful on the defender to maneuver armies to defend the forward third and natural than the safe third and natural. I would suggest pushing the low ground third closer to the natural and maybe even changing the orientation of the nearby ramp to make more space to accommodate this change. As an alternative to this suggested change, you could keep the current fixed third as the desired third and redesign the low ground base as an intended fourth.
Cerulean Fall I'm confused if the title is supposed to be "Fall" or "Falls." Aesthetically this is another beautiful map and similar to Sovereign (if I remember correctly NegativeZero said Sovereign inspired some of the texturing). I particularly love how the central path goes right past the two high grounds so close to the ramps. I can picture a lot of microing and positioning to happen around the center of the map, and can see some units choosing to detour up the ramp in order to catch their opponent off guard. The thirds are ambiguous, yet still have different features that make choosing to expand to one or the other a significant choice, with one on the high ground and the other on low ground. The low ground one is closer, spots drops into the main from a frontal assault, and is forward towards your opponent. The high ground one is a little further away, but also further away from your opponent. To compensate, it's relatively more open with the ramp being pushed away from the base, and there is a roundabout backdoor path for harassment, but also for later expanding. Overall this map is very good and definitely one of my favorites.
Artana This map is aesthetically nice, but I'm not sold on its balance. I think this should have been considered a macro map and I am surprised to see it in the standard category. The aesthetic style, while old and overused, is still great and I think it's a good time for a resurgence of aesthetics like those seen on maps with lots of green (Tal'darim Altar comes to mind, and I guess Overgrowth to a lesser extent). I think that the layout here is poor and needs improvement. The pocket third is set up as the easier third, and this is a mistake in my opinion. It's the same issue here as with Fracture, but even worse. I do not like the watchtower locations on this map because of how useful they are in spotting drops moving across the map. Typically drops move in a somewhat roundabout path towards the opposing base, with the extremes being through the center or around the edge of the map. Usually players will opt for something between going around the edge of the map since it takes too long, and going through the center since it is too dangerous and more likely to be spotted. On Artana, this conventional wisdom regarding drops is turned on its head, and I don't like it.
Lost and Found The system works! Interesting map name, but I like it. I feel like mapmakers have not fully explored the naming possibilities that no one has thought of yet. This TLMC is really starting to scratch the surface with this map and Backpfeifengesicht. Aesthetics are unique, which is getting more and more difficult as mapmakers are getting more and more artistic and creative, but there may be some issues with the lighting. It seems to me like the contrast is off a bit or something. This is another one of my favorites. It has plenty of attack paths, both open areas and choked areas, great use of destructible rocks and excellent use of space.
Digital Frontier I think having a map in a map pool with a direct, strong natural-to-natural path is a good feature when it's not overused (map pools must use maps with different features and not maps with all the same features, otherwise there is no point in having a pool of maps at all). When I first saw this map, I wanted to compare it to an old map Odyssey by lefix (not Avex's Odyssey) for its similarity in design. Obviously, much has changed about the game since that map was published. I believe that the natural to natural direct path is balanced and not too favored for Terran because the forward third is not located on this same path. If it were, this map would be too Terran favored in my opinion. The thirds here are very ambiguous, almost to the point where it is difficult to tell which would be a better choice for which strategy. The expansion pattern is static after that, with both players expanding horizontally. Aesthetically this map is very easy on the eyes like 16-Bit and has pretty colors. I love the Tron theme.
Arashi I mistakenly thought that the Reaper path by the natural was a backdoor into the natural and freaked out, but that isn't the case. This is a great example of how to design and make a balanced rush map. It has the short rush distance, but it is also choked up and filled with line-of-sight-blockers as a trade-off. The third is fixed, which is a good feature for an aggressive map in my opinion because it makes balancing the thirds and managing space on a smaller map easier. My favorite feature about this map are the locations of the watchtowers. By putting then into those crevices, it artificially restricts the movement not only on the low ground, but also on the high ground. I think that some of the doodads are distracting though, specifically the cannons that blast plasma into the air. I'd argue that these should be removed or replaced with some other doodad.
Cybros Relay Station Aesthetically, this map needs improvement. The texturing and overall decoration is kinda mediocre, and even subpar compared to some of the other finalists. I like the use of the high ground around the map and the lack of expansions near the center of the map. As someone who belives that air units have recently been overpowered, it's nice to see a map that limits the features that air units can abuse. I think for a rush map the thirds here are too far away, and what's up with that obstruction by the pocket third? It seems like the attacker benefits more from the space restriction than the defender.
Dreamcatcher I love the layout here! It can be difficult to design a conversely symmetrical map due to the struggle of balancing one side of the map vs the other, but Dreamcatcher succeeds at this. Something that helps it do this are the thirds. The option of which third to take is not right away a question of aggression or defense like on other maps. While the thirds towards the top right side of the map are the forward thirds, they are not really any closer to your opponent's main or natural than the alternative third. This changes however if both players were to expand towards the top right because the distance between the forward thirds and the distance between a forward third and the opposite defensive third are not equal. Overall solid layout. Aesthetically I was turned off by the pattern-style texturing seen in the overview, but this is more of a personal preference.
System Shock The air wall and watchtowers is an interesting feature. I do not really know how this feature will be used in games. Most scrubs won't read the map description and therefore won't know about the air wall (like me lol). In fact, if I remember correctly, the first tournament game on this map saw both and Oracle fly into the wall and a full Medivac by the Terran player.
Backpfeifengesicht Backpfeifengesicht aka Punchable Face aka Backrandomletters aka Backidontspeakgerman aka Ted Cruz is something I really want to like, but I know deep down that this gold base feature will not fly. It's just not balanced. Zerg has a more difficult time punishing a fast expanding player since they do not have immediate access to ranged units, while Terran can just build a Sensor Tower which covers a seriously large amount of space around that base on a map of this size. I think the map can be saved if the gold base is blocked by rocks, or maybe even something less inhibitive like a neutral depot or maybe a bunch of critters wandering around. In ZvP or ZvT, I don't think Zerg will ever take that base as the natural. I really want to like this map though, because it looks awesome and creative, but I'm worried.
Travincal Based on what I saw on Wardi's stream there may be some performance issues. The line-of-sight blockers for both air and ground is an interesting feature and I wonder what kind of effect it will have on engagements around the map. I think that the risk vs. reward of the central pathway is a little insignificant due to how close the high ground ramp pathway around them is. What I am trying to say is that the difference between going through the low ground and going around on the high ground is very small, which makes me think players will opt for the high ground more often then not. I think maybe extending the two high ground platforms into the center so that there is no longer a low ground path and instead there are two high ground paths would be more interesting.
Parasite is an interesting map to play on, that game of Snute vs INnoVation though was very interesting I imagine in TvT though regardless of the third base you choose the other one is a spot you can easily be punished by
What I am trying to say is that the difference between going through the low ground and going around on the high ground is very small, which makes me think players will opt for the high ground more often then not.
This little pathway is really only there for scouting early on and serves like a catalyst-center. It's narrowness *should* be forcing players up to the highground to engage with the main features of the map. Sounds like this is successful, so far.
I'm quite disappointed with some of the finalists of this TLMC. 2 of the 3 maps of the New category seem unplayable to me. Also, how did Dreamcatcher get into the finalists?
What I am trying to say is that the difference between going through the low ground and going around on the high ground is very small, which makes me think players will opt for the high ground more often then not.
This little pathway is really only there for scouting early on and serves like a catalyst-center. It's narrowness *should* be forcing players up to the highground to engage with the main features of the map. Sounds like this is successful, so far.
I agree that it should be forcing players on the high ground, but the force on Travincal is too strong in my opinion, and it's not too strong on Catalyst. There is a small difference between the center of Catalyst and of Travincal that I'm gonna point out. You can see that on Catalyst, the commitment between choosing paths is higher: on Travincal, you have three ramps on each of the high grounds that exist near the center, while on Catalyst there are only two. Moving around and choosing between faster-but-more-dangerous and longer-but-safer means nothing if you're actually choosing between tiny-bit-faster-and-dangerous and tiny-bit-longer-and-safe; the payoffs from choosing the high ground relative to the low ground are too high. Catalyst differentiates the paths more so than Travincal does, in my opinion.
EDIT: My bad, I was looking at Catalyst and not Neo Catalyst. Neo Catalyst WITHOUT the rocks at the center ramps has basically the same issue as Travincal, but in my opinion, the rocks blocking the center ramps really change the map. I think using rocks to block one of the ramps on Travincal may fix the issue, but at the same time, I think that solution may cause more problems than it fixes because the use of rocks on Travincal is already unique and adding more rocks may mess everything up. I really love the use of the destructible and collapsible rocks outside the thirds on Travincal because it's something that I haven't really seen before.
On February 18 2018 21:15 Durnuu wrote: Most of the standard maps look like they belong in the macro category. They're all so big.
Tbh this category has hugely improved size wise compared to previous TLMCs. Last TLMC the 'standard' maps were Catalyst which is legitimately standard and the absolutely enormous Eastwatch, Grime and Acid Plant. This TLMC we have Fracture and Blueshift which are standard (with Fracture even being on the small side for standard), Artana and Cerulean Fall(s?) which are too big for standard, and Digital Frontier and Lost and Found which are borderline.
Though all these terms are lines in the sand. Makes me wonder how they can try to encourage more Fracture sized maps and get rid of Rush as a category (which has been a failure every TLMC), since the borders between categories are confused enough as is.
Maybe they should just have Small, Medium and Large with Small going from true rush maps to slightly bigger than Fracture, Medium going from there to slightly smaller than the current standard category allows, and Large going from there on. The only way to truly get consistent categories would be to have the judges re-categorize every single map that made it past the initial cut, but that would be a lot of work.
For fun I decided to feed data about a bunch of LotV ladder maps into a simple machine learning classifier, to see if it could accurately classify the TLMC10 maps as 'rush', 'standard' or 'macro'.
Specifically I fed in the "Area", the "Short Side Length", the "Long Side Length", "Main to main distance by air", "Base count", "Main to main distance by ground", "Two base to two base distance by ground", "Three base to three base distance by ground". When there are multiple possible thirds I chose the one farther away, and to measure the "two base to two base" and "three base to three base" I chose the closest point along the path ground units would travel between the main/nat/third. For example for the "Three base to three base distance" for Catalyst I measured the distance between the two following points: + Show Spoiler +
.
For the training data I used the following maps and classifications:
Abiogenesis: Rush Acid Plant: Macro Backwater: Macro Blackpink: Macro Catalyst: Standard Eastwatch: Macro Neon Violet Square: Macro Battle on the Boardwalk: Rush Ascension to Aiur: Macro Odyssey: Macro Abyssal Reef: Standard Acolyte: Macro Interloper: Rush Mech Depot: Macro Sequencer: Macro Blood Boil: Macro Defender’s Landing: Rush Proxima Station: Macro Bel’Shir Vestige: Standard Paladino Terminal: Rush Newkirk Precinct: Standard Daybreak: Standard Habitation Station: Standard Overgrowth: Standard Vaani Research Station: Macro Apotheosis: Macro Frozen Temple: Standard Galactic Process: Macro King Sejong Station: Standard New Gettysburg: Macro
It gave me the following results: Treachery: Macro 16-bit: Macro Kherrisan Rift: Macro Para Site: Macro Blueshift: Standard Fracture: Rush Cerulean Falls: Standard Artana: Macro Lost and Found: Standard Digital Frontier: Standard Arashi: Rush Cybros Relay Station: Rush Dreamcatcher: Rush System Shock: Rush Backpfeifengesicht: Standard Travincal: Standard
Which doesn't seem too bad size-wise, though there's still a few problems. For example it does classify Frozen Temple as a Rush Map which seems a bit off.
Any suggestions about map features I should have included, or the categories or values I chose? (adding more size categories than just "rush", "standard", "macro" would be interesting, but I didn't feel confident in my ability to accurately differentiate between "medium" maps and "medium-large" maps).
On February 19 2018 10:33 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Which doesn't seem too bad size-wise, though there's still a few problems. For example it does classify Frozen Temple as a Rush Map which seems a bit off.
Was the map where every PvZ was cyber block into immortal all-in (or queen ravager all-in if P didn't all-in) and every TvZ 3rax reaper vs ravager all-in not a rush map?
On February 19 2018 10:33 ZigguratOfUr wrote: Which doesn't seem too bad size-wise, though there's still a few problems. For example it does classify Frozen Temple as a Rush Map which seems a bit off.
Was the map where every PvZ was cyber block into immortal all-in (or queen ravager all-in if P didn't all-in) and every TvZ 3rax reaper vs ravager all-in not a rush map?
It wasn't quite that bad. PvZs sometimes went long on Frozen Temple. Though maybe this machine learning classifier is just smarter than I am by calling it 'Rush'.
Alright here is my ranking of the maps with opinions after casting them all week, obviously this is all just my own opinion / slightly influenced by what some of the pros have said.
16 - System Shock
The map just doesn't really make sense - the watch towers give you very minimal information vs Terran/Protoss (I suppose you can watch for when the Natural is taken? Otherwise you just build everything outside of watch tower view.) For Zerg however if you spawn top side your Larva can be seen from the watchtower which is so insanely broken because people can see what is being built. No balance here and it naturally lead to very quick games.
15 - Backpfeifengesicht
I'm always down for the cool ideas of giving players a choice of bases and their being a high risk vs high reward feature of a Natural gold, but I think the games really just showed us that holding a mineral line which is so open and easily attacked from the other side just doesn't work. I enjoy the idea of the map and if I was judging this was definitely a great idea, but it just doesn't work well in practice sadly.
14 - Kherrisan Rift
This map saw its best showing in the finals with a long game of INnoVation vs soO, but I think this is more because INno chose to just sit, wall off and do nothing. Obviously it is a macro map and the idea is to create a map which allows for long games and makes it harder to attack on, but compared to the other macro maps this map really felt like it was just way too difficult to attack in mid-late, which is why a lot of players looked to end games early instead of letting it go on. Way too choke heavy, force field/zone control friendly.
13 - Travincal
I don't think this map really made much of an impression on me. The "new" feature of the LOS blockers was tough to see in so few games and so it just felt like an ordinary map with a super defensive four bases. Maybe it didn't get the games it deserved, but just felt uninteresting when we saw it.
12 - Fracture
I wanted to enjoy Fracture more, but I was pretty neutral about this map. I'm putting it low down because I feel for a "standard" map there were just better options (I would probably prefer to play this map more than others I rate higher honestly, but that's not how I'm doing my ranking :D). Three bases on high ground and easy to defend feels standard, but it's so quick to push across and I really felt this limited the games we saw. Also it feels difficult to find an open space to attack, with the choked center / rocks which allow you to play the choke points all the way until you reach your opponents base.
11 - Lost and Found
The faded colour scheme / lighting on this map made it very difficult to watch games. Whatever setting it was that's been changed affected health bars, writing and all sorts. Multiple players complained that their units just looked different because of it and sometimes it was hard to see units too. I think the lighting has hurt this map more than anything else. It showed us a fun ZvZ between Bly and Solar, which showcased the heavy amount of ramps, but I felt there was also good amounts of space to fight on too.
10 - Cybros Relay Station
A rush map that didn't really get me too excited, but still provided some fun games. I feel MMA vs Nerchio really showcased the weakness of this map later game, which is going past a fourth can be very difficult for a non-Zerg with so many pathways to attack on and the size of the map allowing rotations of fast moving runbys to take advantage. I feel the top right/bottom left of the map rarely got used and I'm still unsure about that big rock on the third. Wouldn't say I disliked the map, but the other rush maps definitely gave me more of a buzz.
9 - Dreamcatcher
This map feels huge for a rush map! I originally rated this one higher in my list, because we didn't see bad games on it, but the more I think about it the less I like it. Drops feel maybe a bit too good and it can be very easy to hold a lot of bases. I think the map lacks some structure in general, because when we never really saw a lot of interesting occurrences in the center of the map and there were limited reasons to go anywhere other than through the shorter rush distance.
8 - Cerulean Falls
The size of this map really surprised me when I got in-game! I don't have a lot to say about this one sadly, I feel a lot of the games on this map were alright but nothing spectacular. We saw very standard three bases, which it does well, but it's hard to know how the rest of it's architecture really plays out. I think the combination of choking the open areas while also having ramps leading into them can be interesting, but not sure how well it plays out.
7 - Treachery
A more well-executed macro map which I feel I only rate so low because it kind of does its job so well : it creates macro games with not a lot happening. Easy map to split and take multiple bases on early, while creating scrappier games in the later stages because beyond 6 bases you really have to extend out to expand further. I'm personally not a fan of the 'macro category' in general, I feel like having one macro map in a map pool is fine, but they aren't the maps that get me the most excited. I can't fault this map though, it definitely does its job.
6 - 16 Bit
This map does a pocket expansion well. I love it and I love the simple and clean decoration too (something which for me who looks at the maps a lot while casting is a big part of how much I like some of them ;D but not the only thing!!) I really wonder if there is a way to make this map just a tiny bit smaller, because I feel its only flaw is that it is slightly too large. An in-base expansion is always a fun way to have one map be different to others on the map pool and I was pleasantly surprised that more of the macro maps didn't use it as a way to simply be "macro". It never felt like the bases were being taken for free (something I felt on Treachery/Kherrisan for example), but it still had the macro feel. Multiple pathways, different expansion patterns, I was genuinely surprised the players vetoed this map so often.
5 - Arashi
So this map has be super torn. We didn't get to see any super long games on this map (which I suppose is what is meant to happen on a rush map?), but I have to say I think the idea of it was really nice. It sticks to it's nature of being a rush map in so many ways. While it gives you a high ground third, there is a lot of space on the high ground so it is still difficult to hold. Later there are also rocks that can go down to open it up even further. It really is a rush map from the start of the game until the later stages, which is why I rated it so highly, I think it does its job in a unique way. I like how the rocks going down on the third actually create the fourth base too. Really fun map in its concept, which is why it is this high in my rankings.
4 - Artana
It's getting difficult to split up my rankings for the last few maps because I like #2-#4 about the same amount I feel for different reasons. Artana gave us some fantastic games, it has a unique third being on the low ground but accessible from multiple directions and can even lead into a choice of expansions. The map is maybe a bit too choked on the right and left hand side (feels very difficult to attack into the fourth above/below the main?) but has some good open spaces as well. This map pleasantly surprised me in how it played out, which is why it is #4 in my ranking. It's standard in a fun way!
3 - Digital Frontier
Okay I really didn't know whether to put this map at #3 or #2, but I put it at #3 because I think it is slightly less interesting at what it does than #2. It has some fun sets of rocks which change the map as it goes on as well as a third base that you can hold but not without some defensive units. This is definitely the definition of "clean, simple and fun to look at" when it comes to maps for me and I just enjoyed watching all the games on this one. Fun pathway options throughout the map as well mixes it up and allows each game to feel different with how players choose to move their units.
2 - Para Site
Ahh! I didn't think I liked this map so much but the more I thought about it I really think it's a macro map I can get behind. It doesn't feel stupidly large, it gives you a fairly easy three and four base set-up (with a choice of fourth bases depending on how you want to expand). A fifth base comes down in a more forward location, allowing for engagements to be created towards your opponents base. And while these bases are easy to defend, the choices on how you can move your army stop it from feeling too split-map friendly. soO vs INno in the finals showed what this map can allow for, fun back and forth games with a lot of engagements, positions you can fall back to defensively but also locations you can push more easily. This map just felt right.
1 - Blueshift
If this map isn't in the next ladder map pool I'm going to be heartbroken. First up it's straight up beautiful to look at (some players said it was a bit dark, but I've never had this issue of maps being too dark so it may be dependent on settings.) Secondly I love the way that you can almost tell how this map was made, it's taken aspects of maps that have worked so well in the past and adapted them to make it different enough, but still great to play. For me it reminds me the most of Catalyst, with a similar base structure but different high/low ground options. Obviously the pathway through the center has a lot to do with that, which is made interesting as the game continues due to the rocks which give the map more complexity as the game goes on.
What I love about this map is it takes away some of the split map presence Catalyst has, by not having the forward base, which creates a more spread defense for armies later in the game. I really feel it creates fun macro games that promote moving around the map rather than sitting back doing nothing. Everything on this map works for me, which is why it's my number 1.
Was awesome to get to run this tournament again! Apologies for the Group D cast where I was on a bit of a life tilt, as well as for the issues we had with some of the players (not much I can do here apart from not invite them back in the future.) If any of the map makers have any feedback on how the tournament phase went I would love to hear it so that I can improve on it if I get the chance to run the tournament phase again in the future.
On February 21 2018 00:50 Wardi wrote: An in-base expansion is always a fun way to have one map be different to others on the map pool and I was pleasantly surprised that more of the macro maps didn't use it as a way to simply be "macro".
Nope. I haven't done any work on Vanguard. Arashi was known as Stormbender for a long while, then I did some name changes because it sounded too clunky.
On February 18 2018 23:01 -NegativeZero- wrote: it would be a huge pain in the ass, but i guess the finalists do have the option to shrink their maps during the revision process lol
Im going for it with 16bit. May take 300 hours or so.
On February 18 2018 23:01 -NegativeZero- wrote: it would be a huge pain in the ass, but i guess the finalists do have the option to shrink their maps during the revision process lol
Im going for it with 16bit. May take 300 hours or so.
300 hours?! Wow and I thought I was slow at making maps.
On February 18 2018 23:01 -NegativeZero- wrote: it would be a huge pain in the ass, but i guess the finalists do have the option to shrink their maps during the revision process lol
Im going for it with 16bit. May take 300 hours or so.
300 hours?! Wow and I thought I was slow at making maps.
Iteration period is ~480 hours so I would be very impressed if he spent that much time.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/9mTIE1t.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/fuGPUdy.png)
![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/207207985091444737/414316388493295616/16Bit.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/207207985091444737/414311969462550528/TLMC10_9edit.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/207207985091444737/414305805840416768/similar.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/V9EqC4e.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/MmAx3Pxl.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/AfG96TPl.jpg)
